Good point. Still, I think that the risk to tourists passing through the border is pretty minimal. I've been on the US mexican embassy mailing list, and I readily admit that occasionally I receive an email saying something like: Nuevo Laredo is super fucked up at the moment and police stations are getting bombed. Do not go there. However, this is rare, so considering the short amount of time one would spend at the border, combined with the relative rarity of these places being dangerous to non-drug-traffickers, I think you have to be really unlucky or just acting stupid to get in trouble. Like almost anywhere else.
I've been traveling in Mexico for the last two months. I have never been more surprised by a country: the incredible ancient prehispanic and colonial architecture, beautiful landscapes, and modern, friendly cities. The border is horrible - one hundred miles south of the border (I visited Monterrey and Cd. Chihuahua) is beautiful and safe. Look up pictures of Zacatecas and Guanajuato - amazing. Corruption and drug use are a big issue, but tourists are safe (except from using your credit card at sketchy clubs to buy drinks... whoops). To me, Mexico feels like a country rapidly moving towards the first world, not the other way around. In the US, we really only hear the bad stuff, but doesn't begin to sum up feeling in this country - everyone I've met seems optimistic, if not somewhat bitter about government corruption. Also, here is a very important and recognized recent article from the Mexican magazine Proceso, with an interview with the second in command Mexican drug trafficking: http://www.proceso.com.mx/rv/modHome/detalleExclusiva/78067 Check it out.
In the example you give, absolutely what you say should not be regulated - however, you must admit campaigns with money to spend no doubt receive far more "I emphatically support you" videos than campaigns with nothing. And yes, I think that if you are being paid to speak for a lobbyist there should be some limitations - a special law for bloggers may be necessary because as a form of speech it is so different from anything else. however, i wish i knew the actual motivations for this debate in congress, which i'm sure has no basis in actual morality.